Former director of public prosecutions, now High Court Judge Geoffrey Henderson could be the only individual to whom Attorney General John Jeremie referred, when he spoke of a chief legal officer who disregarded an opinion from a Queen’s Counsel, advising on the laying of charges against certain prominent persons.

This was the strong view in legal and public service circles yesterday as comment on the Attorney General’s budget contribution reached a pitch.

Jeremie went on to say that this decision could have cost the Government and people $1 billion thus far.

Jeremie, in his statement to Parliament on Wednesday, did not call any name. But he narrowed his allegation to three offices when he said that ’the holder of the chief legal offices, that is the Solicitor General, the Chief Parliamentary Counsel (CPC) and the Director of Public Prosecutions, were designated Chief Legal Officers pursuant to Section 12 of the Judicial and Legal Services Act’.

The Attorney General, however, further narrowed the focus when he said ’in my time as Attorney General, I have encountered a Chief Legal Officer who disregarded an opinion done by a Queen’s Counsel retained by him. The opinion advised on the laying of a criminal charge in respect of prominent persons in the society’.

Of the three Chief Legal Officers, the DPP is the only one in the group who has the power to institute prosecutions and therefore would have been the only one seeking legal advice on the laying of criminal charges.

The CPC deals with the drafting of legislation, while the Solicitor General gives legal advice to the Government on civil (not criminal) matters.

The third giveaway was the Attorney General’s consistent masculine gender reference, when referring to the Chief Legal Officer. ’An opinion... retained by him (the Chief Legal Officer)... It is true that the Chief Legal Officer had complete authority to disregard the opinion. But he commissioned it at State expense presumably for his guidance and he hid it, choosing not to consult with the Attorney General on the matter, for reasons best known to himself,’ Jeremie stated in the Parliament.

During Jeremie’s tenure as Attorney General in the last administration, the Solicitor General was a woman-Lynette Stephenson, SC-who is now Ombudsman. The most senior person in the department currently is also female-Carol Hernandez.

The Chief Parliamentary Counsel in Jeremie’s time was Claire Blake, SC, and she served in that position since Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj was Attorney General.

Furthermore, the issue to which Jeremie referred in the Parliament formed part of the discussion in correspondence between himself and Henderson, which was published in the Sunday Express in May.

In the letters between the two men, Jeremie chastised Henderson for his reticence in laying charges against a certain person. Jeremie pointed out that he had an opinion from a senior counsel that charges should be laid. The correspondence which was published revealed that the Queen’s Counsel was Karl Hudson-Phillips. The Express has learnt that the Queen’s Counsel referred to by Jeremie in the Parliament is Sir Timothy Cassel.

The Express also understood that the billion-dollar cost to the people and Government of Trinidad and Tobago, to which Jeremie referred, related to events in the financial sector, which resulted in State intervention in excess of $1.2 billion.

The exchange of correspondence between Jeremie and Henderson resulted in the passage of a no-confidence motion by members of the Law Association in Jeremie. See Pages 4 & 9